Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Hypocrisy of pro-lifers being anti-LGBTQIA

Opinion

Hypocrisy of pro-lifers being anti-LGBTQIA
Getty Images

Steve Corbin is Professor Emeritus of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.

The prefix “pro-“ means to support a cause. The noun “life” is defined as an organism composed of cells that can grow, learn and respond to stimuli preceding death. It stands to reason that a pro-lifer is a radical proponent that from cell development until death -- everyone -- is supported. Everyone!


Most right-wing evangelicals and conservative Catholics proudly boast of being pro-life. MAGA Republican die-hards fondly recall a January 2020 March for Life rally where Donald Trump thanked participants for “making America the pro-family, pro-life nation.”

Simply stated, you cannot be pro-life unless you also support the 7.2 percent of babies who grow up to be LGBTQIA and – by the way – are living under the same canopy of heaven and with God’s divine grace.

LGBTQIA is an abbreviation for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning, intersex, asexual/aromantic/agender. One out of every 13 people you meet could be LGBTQIA (Gallup, Feb. 2023). Medical research is replete with evidence that 1.7 percent of human births are intersex (Journal of Sex Research), whereby the genitalia cannot be classified as female (XX chromosomes) or male (XY chromosomes). The Novo Nordisk Foundation reveals intersex children and their parents are not aware of the chromosome gene mutation until the child reaches puberty.

The LGBTQIA population breaks down – per Gallup research -- as follows:

1) 20.8 percent of Gen Z (age 20-26), 2) 10.5 percent of Millennials (age 27-42), 3) 4.2 percent of Gen Z (age 43-58), 4) 2.6 percent of Baby Boomers (age 59-77) and 5) 0.8 percent of Traditionalists (78 and older).

Seventy-nine percent of Americans want to protect LGBTQIA rights. Deniers of the LGBTQIA population probably don’t know – or if they do know shame on them -- repercussions of their “anti-“ stance. According to a 2021 survey by the Trevor Project, over 50 percent of transgender and non-binary kids have considered suicide and 93 percent say they worry about state laws denying transgender people access to gender-affirming medical care.

Research conducted by Child Trends revealed a statistically significant increase in mental health crisis text lines when anti-LGBTQIA legislation bills are introduced. LGBTQIA teens are five times more likely to make an attempt on their life than their straight peers. Negative actions and attitudes against LGBTQIA teenagers can have serious, life-altering consequences. This data should be a wakeup call for pro-lifers, especially if they value life and disdain suicide and mental health issues.

In October of 2018, Mr. Trump sought to reclassify people into an “unchangeable” category of male or female, which completely denies the existence of transgender and intersex people; a clear violation of human rights. I presume pro-lifers value human rights.

Organizations behind the anti-LGBTQIA legislation that’s been introduced in over 42 states include the conservative legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation and the Christian nationalist (who despise all other religions and are anti-Semitic) lobby group Family Policy Alliance.

When 79 percent of Americans who support LGBTQIA rights witness evangelical parishioners and houses of worship tout anti-LGBTQIA beliefs, might this be one reason behind the decline of religious affiliation and church attendance?

Mayors, city council and school board members plus county, state and federal elected officials who took an oath of office to represent all citizens and are anti-LGBTQIA have betrayed the public’s trust and society’s soul. We the People – as per the Constitution -- should do our utmost to rid prejudice-laden politicians from serving unless they can represent 100 percent of their respective citizenry.

Pro-life citizens who are anti-LGBTQIA should seriously reflect on what Nelson Mandella – who devoted his life to the service of humanity -- once said, “there can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”


Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less